performance validation on an all- fiber 1 54 m pulsed

Performance validation on an all-fiber 1.54-μm pulsed coherentDoppler lidar for wind-profilemeasurement

Heng LiuLucheng YuanChunhui FanFeifei LiuXin ZhangXiaopeng ZhuJiqiao LiuXiaolei ZhuWeibiao Chen

Heng Liu, Lucheng Yuan, Chunhui Fan, Feifei Liu, Xin Zhang, Xiaopeng Zhu, Jiqiao Liu,Xiaolei Zhu, Weibiao Chen, “Performance validation on an all-fiber 1.54-μm pulsed coherentDoppler lidar for wind-profile measurement,” Opt. Eng. 59(1), 014109 (2020), doi: 10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 04 Jun 2022Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Performance validation on an all-fiber 1.54-µm pulsedcoherent Doppler lidar for wind-profile measurement

Heng Liu,a,b Lucheng Yuan,a,b Chunhui Fan,c Feifei Liu,a Xin Zhang,a

Xiaopeng Zhu,a,b,* Jiqiao Liu,a,b Xiaolei Zhu,a,b,* and Weibiao Chena,b

aChinese Academy of Science, Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics, KeyLaboratory of Space Laser Communication and Detection Technology, Shanghai, China

bUniversity of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Center of Materials Science andOptoelectronics Engineering, Beijing, China

cNational University of Defense Technology, College of Meteorology and Oceanography,Nanjing, China

Abstract. The characteristics and capability of a homemade all-fiber 1.54-μm pulsed coherentDoppler lidar (CDL) were validated in field experiments by comparing the detection results witha collocated lidar and sounding balloons. With the range gate of 30 m and temporal resolution of16 s at velocity–azimuth display mode, the detection capability of the CDL ranged from 0.1 to5 km, and the time sequence and height position of this CDL were calibrated by the collocatedlidar. In the intercomparison experiments with sounding balloons, the discrepancy of 30-saveraged measurement results of horizontal wind speed and wind direction was nearly 0.7 m∕sand 5.3 deg, respectively. The good agreement achieved in such a short averaged time periodwas a convincing case of intercomparison experiments between CDL and sounding balloon.The CDL system demonstrated good reliability and operational stability in field experiments.© The Authors. Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License.Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original pub-lication, including its DOI. [DOI: 10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109]

Keywords: all-fiber; coherent Doppler lidar; wind profile; field experiments; intercomparison;sounding balloons.

Paper 191580 received Nov. 8, 2019; accepted for publication Dec. 24, 2019; published onlineJan. 21, 2020.

1 Introduction

Coherent Doppler lidar (CDL) has been developed as a powerful tool for atmospheric windvelocity measurement,1–4 aircraft wake-vortex hazard detection,5–7 and wind turbulencemeasurement8,9 with high temporal space resolution and high measurement accuracy due to itshigh carrier-to-noise detecting characteristics. The enabling modules for high-performance CDLsystem include laser transmitter,10–12 balanced detection,13,14 and weak-regime wind estimationalgorithm.15,16 Adopting a single longitudinal mode laser and a balanced detector is helpful fora CDL to realize high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Recently, all-fiber 1.5-μm pulsed CDL hasattracted much attention due to its eye safety, compactness, flexible deployment, and maturefiber components from telecommunication industry.17

The performance of CDL has been proved by intercomparison experiments with reliablewind measurement instruments in the past dozen years. The first high pulse energy CDL(∼100 mJ at 2-μm wavelength) was developed by NASA Langley Research Center; it was usedas a calibration and validation lidar (so-called “Validar”),18 and the intercomparison resultswith ground-based wind-observing lidar facility were so encouraging.19 Mitsubishi ElectricCorporation developed an airborne 1.5-μm pulsed CDL, which was capable of detecting as faras 9.3 km with modifiable range resolutions, and the wind velocity measurement accuracy ofthe prototype was inspected in comparison with L-band wind profiler.20–22 In 2011, Leospheredisplayed a long-range lidar (Windcube 200S), which could measure three-dimensional (3-D)

*Address all correspondence to Xiaopeng Zhu, E-mail: [email protected]; Xiaolei Zhu, E-mail: [email protected]

Optical Engineering 014109-1 January 2020 • Vol. 59(1)


https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109

https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109

https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109

https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109

https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109

https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.59.1.014109

mailto:[email protected]




wind profiles up to 7 km in distance with 70-m range resolution, and the radial velocity with0.5-m∕s velocity resolution was validated by another lidar (Windcube 70).23 In 2016, Zhaiet al.24 developed a 1.5-μm pulsed CDL with variable spatial resolution from 15 to 60 m; itsdiscrepancies with radiosonde observation results were within acceptable limits. In 2017, Wanget al.3 presented a versatile CDL with 0.5-m∕smeasurement precision and 6-km detection ability,and its stability was demonstrated by continuous wind detection of the atmospheric boundarylayer. According to the Commission for Instruments and Methods of Observation guidebook,25

the accuracy of high-quality windfinding systems should be maintained in less than wind speedof 1 m∕s and direction of 5-deg level. In view of the accuracy requirement of windfindingsystems, the averaging time period in the intercomparison experiment was set to 30,26 15,4

3 min,27 etc.In this work, an all-fiber 1.54-μm pulsed CDL with high pulse energy (300 μJ∕pulse) laser

at repetition rate of 10 kHz was developed for measuring wind profiles. Dozens of soundingballoons and a collocated lidar were used to verify the reliability and stability of the CDL.The wind measurement capability of the homemade CDL was verified by the sounding balloonswith the time and space interval of merely 30-s and 30-m levels, respectively. To our knowledge,the relatively short averaged time is a convincing case for wind measurement by CDL comparedwith sounding balloons.

2 Methodology

2.1 Pulsed CDL System

The pulsed CDL transmits narrow bandwidth laser pulses into the atmosphere, and then the lineof sight (LOS) wind velocity can be acquired by calculating the Doppler shift caused by movingaerosols. This pulsed CDL system is mainly composed of high-energy single-frequency pulsedlaser source, optical antenna system, highly sensitive heterodyne detector, signal acquisition, andreal-time processing section. The system diagram is shown in Fig. 1.

The pulsed laser unit is a master oscillator power amplification system, and the seeder laser isa distributed feedback single-frequency continuous wave laser.12 The seeder laser beam is di-vided into two parts by a 1 × 2 optical fiber splitter. One part (about 0.8 mW) is used as the localoscillator (LO) for heterodyne detection, and the other part is pulse modulated and frequency(intermediate frequency: 160 MHz) shifted by an acousto-optic modulator. The laser pulse wasamplified by multistage optical fiber amplifiers and finally up to 300-μJ pulse energy output with

Laser light

f f + f i

f

f + f i

f +f i+ f D

f +f i+ f D

f i + f D

1.54 µm laser source

PMTICW seed laser

Driver&Modulator

Pre-amplifier Power amplifier Circulator

Transceiver

Tele

scop

e

Aerosols

Dual-balancedphotoreceivers

Coupler

Electricalamplifier

Heterodyne detection

A\DConverter

Data storage (PC)

Optical fiber Electric wire

Signal processing electronics

Pulse

· LOS wind velocity· 3D wind profiles

Power unit &Control unit

Scanner

FPGA

EYDFAEDFA

f D=2 · v

LOS/λ

vL O S

v

Fig. 1 System diagram of the pulsed CDL (PMTI, polarization-maintaining tap isolator; AOM,acousto-optical modulators; EDFA, erbium-doped fiber amplifier; EYDFA, erbium–ytterbiumcodoped fiber amplifier; FPGA, field programmable gate array).

Liu et al.: Performance validation on an all-fiber 1.54-μm pulsed coherent Doppler lidar. . .



pulse duration of 400 ns at 10-kHz pulse repetition rate was obtained. The central wavelengthwas 1540 nm.17

The optical antenna system is mainly composed of a fiber optical circulator, a coaxialtelescope, and a scanner. The fiber circulator is applied to insulate transmitting laser beam andbackscattered signal from aerosols. The outgoing laser beam goes into telescope from the outputport of the circulator, and then is collimated to 80 mm in diameter. The effective aperture of thetelescope is 100 mm. The scanner is used to realize velocity–azimuth display (VAD) scanning byrotating one optical wedge with elevation angle of 20 deg. The LOS wind speeds detected fromeight azimuths are used to retrieve the wind vector within 16 s.

The highly sensitive heterodyne detector is used to detect the frequency beating signal causedby mixing the backscattered signal and the LO beam. The frequency beating signal is obtainedusing a 2 × 2 (50:50) single-mode polarization-maintaining fiber coupler. The heterodyne signalis sampled by an acquisition card with 1 GSPS sampling rate with 10 bits resolution. The totalsampling time is about 40 μs, which is divided into 200 time gates, corresponding to 30-mspace–distance per time gate. Fast Fourier transform (FFT) and power spectrum accumulationsare implemented in every time gate. The power spectra are finally sent to a computer via RS422interface, and the LOS wind velocity can be obtained by the traditional peak detection method.The main parameters of the CDL system are listed in Table 1.

To extract the peak value of the power spectra corresponding to the Doppler shift, gravitymethod is used here, and the LOS wind velocity can be expressed as4

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e001;116;496vgLOS ¼ λ

2

fsN

·

PNxþF∕2x¼Nx−F∕2 x · PsðfxÞPNxþF∕2x¼Nx−F∕2

PsðfxÞ− fIF

!; (1)

where λ is the laser wavelength, fs is the sampling rate, N is the total number of FFT points,Ps is the amplitude of the point in the width of power spectra, Nx is the peak value location ofthe power spectra, F is the integration window width, and fIF is the intermediate frequency.The integration window width here is approximately set to be 6 MHz.28

The multiazimuth LOS wind velocities usually have the sine function in VAD scanningmode, which is applied to eliminate the exceptional points and reduce random error. The 3-Dwind profiles can be rebuilt by

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e002;116;359vLOS ¼ uðzÞ sin θ sin φþ vðzÞ cos θ sin φþ wðzÞ cos φ; (2)

Table 1 Main parameters of the pulsed CDL system.

Component Qualification Specification

Transmitter (seeder:RIO Inc. RIO0099-XX)

Operating wavelength 1540 nm

Pulse energy 300 μJ

Pulse repetition rate 10 kHz

Pulse width 400 ns

Transceiver(homemade)

Scan VAD mode

Zenith angle 20 deg

Number of azimuth 8

Scanning period 16 s

Acquisition card(AD: ADS5400)

Sampling rate 1 GSPS

Resolution 10 bits ADC

Range gate 30 m

Total sampling time 40 μs




EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e003;116;723vh ¼ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiu2 þ v2

p; (3)

where u, v, and w are the x, y, and z axial projection of wind vector, respectively, θ is the azimuthangle, and φ is the elevation angle.

2.2 Calibration Method of Wind Velocity between Collocated Lidarand the CDL

The collocated lidar (Molas B300), scaled by German WindGuard testing organization, is aDoppler lidar with distance detection range of 40 to 300 m and wind velocity detection rangeof 0 to 60 m∕s. The accuracy of 10-min averaged wind speed and direction is 0.1 m∕s and 1 deg,respectively.

Molas B300 can detect from 40 to 260 m in distance with range gate of 20 m, and its zenithangle is 28 deg. Considering the distance detection range of 0.1 to 5 km for our CDL, it isbelieved that the wind velocity in range of 100 to 260 m is suitable for calibration.

Molas B300 can export both 1-s and 10-min averaged wind speed dataset, and the 1-s datasetcan be utilized in time and height matching with the CDL. On the basis of correct time sequenceand similar height, the comparison results of 10-min averaged wind profiles can be obtained.

2.3 Comparative Method for Horizontal Wind Velocity between SoundingBalloon and the CDL

Sounding balloon can directly detect wind vector by tracking the balloon with Beidou/GPS nav-igation module. The dataset from sounding balloon includes 30-s averaged horizontal windvelocity with 1-s updating period. Its measurement repeatability of the 30-s averaged wind speedand direction of sounding balloon is about 0.2 m∕s and 2 deg, respectively.29,30 The verticalrange resolution is about 5 m in both ascent and descent periods.

The comparison data from sounding balloon and the CDL should also be matched at time andaltitude. Since the horizontal distance between starting point of sounding balloon and the CDLis <50 m, the wind measured by sounding balloon is identified as the wind field detected bythe CDL. The comparative scheme of horizontal wind velocity based on the time and altitudecharacteristics of these two instruments are listed in Table 2.

3 Results and Discussions

In August 2018, concurrent measurements of sounding balloons and Molas B300 were imple-mented in Jingbian City, Shanxi Province. During the field experiments, every sounding balloonwas released once the last one’s detection had been finished, and the local time displayed therecorded time zone of the ground-based CDL, as shown in Table 3.

Tracks of sounding balloons and relative positions of the two instruments are displayed inFig. 2. The altitude of the sounding balloon covers both ascent and descent periods reflected bythe colored curves. Their locations corresponded to the coordinates could roughly indicate thehorizontal wind direction.

Table 2 Comparative scheme of horizontal wind velocity.

Temporalresolution (s)

Datasetupdating time (s)

Altitudeinterval (m)

Sounding balloon 30 1 ∼5

CDL 16 2 30

Comparison 30 ∼1 30




3.1 Calibration of the CDL

To calibrate the wind vector measured by the CDL, Molas B300 was set in campaign. The similaroutline of 1-s level wind velocity of both Molas B300 and the CDL reflects correct time andheight matching of two lidars. To eliminate random error and utilize the secondary datasets(10-min averaged wind velocity of Molas B300), the 10-min averaged wind velocity of twolidars are compared and similar tendency is obtained and plotted in Fig. 3. The time and heightmatching of two lidars shows good accordance after time–height matching.

Statistics analysis of measured vertical wind velocity between the CDL and Molas B300 isshown in Fig. 4. The correlation coefficients (R: 0.964 of horizontal wind speed, 0.992 of hori-zontal wind direction, and 0.963 of vertical wind velocity) revealed a significant correlationbetween two lidar datasets. The discrepancy of 10-min averaged horizontal wind speed anddirection is 0.164 m∕s and 1.719 deg, respectively. The standard deviation of those two kindsof 10-min averaged vertical velocity is decreased to 0.076 m∕s. The bias is −0.069 m∕s, whichreveals a systematic bias due to the intermediate frequency shift. The sample of horizontal windspeed profile also displays high similarity as shown in Fig. 4(d). These results provide thecalibration accuracy of the CDL.

3.2 Intercomparison Experiments of the CDL and Sounding Balloons

The time–altitude matching comparison of horizontal wind velocity between the CDL andsounding balloon, including ascent and descent periods, is presented in Fig. 5. The overall sim-ilarity of wind velocity of two sensors emerges while tiny distinction exists inevitably. Thecommon discrepancy of horizontal wind speed of two sensors is <1 m∕s. The 10-min error baris attached to the measurement dataset of our CDL. At altitude from 1500 to 3000 m, the errorbar is so short due to the high SNR and relatively steady wind field. In the weak detection regime,the error bar increases with low SNR. However, the central measurement data retrieved from theCDL is still close to the measurement data of sounding balloons. The accuracy of the CDL is

Fig. 2 An overview of the field sites. Tracks of sounding balloon are shown in colored curves.Related positions of sensors are marked on the right inset.

Table 3 Summary of field experiments.

No. Date

Local time

Altitude (m) InstrumentStart Stop

1 August 1, 2018 12:50 1:28 am 1332 CDL, balloon, Molas B300

2 August 10, 2018 12:46 1:23 am 1332 CDL, balloon, Molas B300

3 August 15, 2018 18:04 21:51 1332 CDL, balloon, Molas B300




Fig. 3 Calibration of the CDL by Molas B300 (sample at 165-m height). (a) Horizontal wind speedcalibration of the CDL, (b) horizontal wind direction calibration of the CDL, and (c) vertical windvelocity calibration of the CDL.

Fig. 4 Statistic analysis of 10-min averaged wind velocity measured by Molas B300 and thepulsed CDL. (a) Horizontal wind speed correlation, (b) horizontal wind direction correlation,(c) vertical wind velocity correlation, and (d) horizontal wind speed profile.




affected by weak signal regime, atmospheric turbulence, etc. At the end of descent period, thediscrepancy of wind velocity measured by sounding balloon (dot) and the CDL (cross) mainlyascribes to the measured wind field by two sensors. The sounding balloon flies away (about10 km) as time goes by (after 19 min).

Comparison of horizontal wind velocity is shown in Fig. 6. Comparison of wind directionshown in the first row shows good accordance in most situations. In the second row, wind speed

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Alti

tude

(m

)

4500(a) Wind speed comparison (Aug.10th, 22:56) (b) Wind direction comparison (Aug.10th, 22:56)

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Alti

tude

(m

)

4500

Sounding balloonThe CDLAltitude:1332m




1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Alti

tude

(m

)

4500

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Alti

tude

(m

)

4500

0 5 10 15Wind speed (m/s)

20 0 90 180 270 360Wind direction (deg)

(c) Wind speed comparison (Aug.10th, 23:19) (d) Wind direction comparison (Aug.10th, 23:19)

0 5 10 15

Wind speed (m/s)

20 0 90 180 270 360Wind direction (deg)

Fig. 5 Comparison of horizontal wind velocity between the CDL (blue cross, with 10-min error bar)and sounding balloon (red dot). (a) and (b) The horizontal wind speed comparison and horizontalwind direction comparison during the ascent period of sounding balloon, respectively. (c) and(d) The horizontal wind velocity comparison during the descent period of sounding balloon.

1500

2500

3500

4500

Alt

itu

de

(m)

wind direction (deg)

Altitu

de (m

)

Wind speed (m/s)

1500

2500

3500

4500

1500

2500

3500

4500

Alt

itu

de

(m) A

ltitud

e (m)

1500

2500

3500

4500

0 900 90

2018/8/10, 21:27 2018/8/10, 22:44 2018/8/1, 23:51 2018/8/10, 21:562018/8/10, 22:56 2018/8/15, 20:432018/8/15, 21:03

0 90 0 90 0 90 0 90 0 90

0 5 10 15 20

180 270 360180 270 360

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

180 270 360 180 270 360 180 270 360 180 270 360 180 270 360

2018/8/10, 21:27 2018/8/10, 22:44 2018/8/1, 23:51 2018/8/10, 21:562018/8/10, 22:56 2018/8/15, 20:432018/8/15, 21:03















(a)

(b)

Fig. 6 Comparison of horizontal wind velocity detected by CDL and sounding balloon.Comparison of (a) wind direction and (b) wind speed.




detected by two instruments shows similar tendency, and a divergence of about 1 to 2 m∕s of30-s averaged wind speed is found between the CDL and sounding balloon.

Linear correlation and numerous analyses of wind velocity are shown in Fig. 7. The linear fitsof scattering points fluctuate about the line y ¼ x. In combination with the correlation coefficient(R: 0.974 of wind speed and 0.997 of wind direction), an obviously positive correlation betweenthe wind dataset of the CDL and that of sounding balloon is displayed in Fig. 7. The typicaldiscrepancy of wind speed and wind direction between the two systems is about 0.7 m∕s and5.3 deg, respectively. Discarding the accidental error of sounding balloon of manual operation,the little bias of wind speed and direction is mainly affected by the intermediate frequency offsetand due to north deflection of the CDL, respectively.

To our knowledge, the routine sounding balloon system has an accuracy of horizontal windspeed <1 m∕s and wind direction within 5 deg in the lower troposphere.25,31 During the intercom-parison experiments in Jingbian, China, as the referencewith time period of 30 s, vertical resolutionof sounding balloon is better than 150 m. Averaging time period shorter than 2 min cannot reachsufficiently smooth;25 therefore, 30-s averaged wind velocity usually occurs natural turbulent fluc-tuations of wind field. By comparing the wind velocity measured by different principles, the goodagreement of experimental results could testify the accuracy of the CDL with acceptable limits.

3.3 Sample of Continuous Wind-Profile Measurements of the CDL

In August 2018, the field observation was launched and the continuous 3-D wind field datasetswere obtained by the CDL. A measured continuous wind profiles were sampled and shown inFig. 8. The maximum detection altitude on that day was 4400 m (local altitude: 1332 m), whichprovided sufficient detection range in the field experiments.

According to the horizontal wind speed profiles [Fig. 8(a)], the horizontal wind speed was>5 m∕s in most of the time. From 20:00 to 24:00, horizontal wind speed was intensive in rangeof 1500 to 2500 m. Meanwhile, the horizontal wind direction profiles [Fig. 8(b)] revealed thatthe horizontal wind direction was steady at that night.

In the vertical wind velocity profiles [Fig. 8(c)], sign setting on this ground-based systemleads to positive relative speeds for downward winds or vice versa. Throughout the measurementperiod, vertical wind velocity is mostly positive corresponding to downdraft. Interestingly,the vertical wind velocity changes quickly and frequently from 16:00 to 19:00 and becomesrelatively steady on that night.

4 Conclusion

Wind velocity measured by the pulsed CDL shows good agreement with that of collocated windlidar and sounding balloon in field experiments. Time sequence and height positions of the CDL

Fig. 7 Horizontal wind velocity correlation of (a) wind speed and (b) direction on August 2018.




are first calibrated by the collocated lidar. As compared with collocated wind lidar, the 10-minlevel discrepancy of horizontal wind speed, direction, and vertical wind velocity are 0.164 m∕s,1.719 deg, and 0.07 m∕s, respectively. In the intercomparison experiments with soundingballoon, the 30-s level discrepancy of horizontal wind speed and direction is nearly 0.7 m∕sand 5.3 deg, respectively. The CDL system demonstrates the stability and reliability in fieldexperiments.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of Chinaunder Grant No. 2017YFF0104600 and the Pre-Research Project of Civilian Space under GrantNo. D040103. The authors are grateful for the collocated wind lidar Molas B300 provided byMove laser Co., Ltd. They also declare no conflicts of interest.

References

1. S. Wu et al., “Wind turbine wake visualization and characteristics analysis by Doppler lidar,”Opt. Express 24(10), A762–A780 (2016).

Fig. 8 Continuous wind profiles measurement by the ground-based CDL (local altitude: 1332 m)on August 1, 2018. (a) Horizontal wind speed profiles, (b) horizontal wind direction profiles, and(c) vertical wind velocity profiles.




https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.24.00A762

2. T. Fujii and T. Fukuchi, Laser Remote Sensing, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, BocaRaton (2005).

3. C. Wang et al., “1.5 μm polarization coherent lidar incorporating time-division multiplex-ing,” Opt. Express 25(17), 20663–20674 (2017).

4. L. Bu et al., “All-fiber pulse coherent Doppler lidar and its validations,” Opt. Eng. 54(12),123103 (2015).

5. T. Ando et al., “All-fiber coherent Doppler lidar for wind sensing,” inMRS Online Proc. Lib.Arch., Vol. 1076 (2008).

6. S. Rahm and I. Smalikho, “Aircraft wake vortex measurement with airborne coherentDoppler lidar,” J. Aircr. 45(4), 1148–1155 (2008).

7. S. Wu, X. Zhai, and B. Liu, “Aircraft wake vortex and turbulence measurement undernear-ground effect using coherent Doppler lidar,” Opt. Express 27(2), 1142–1163 (2019).

8. I. N. Smalikho and V. A. Banakh, “Measurements of wind turbulence parameters by a coni-cally scanning coherent Doppler lidar in the atmospheric boundary layer,” Atmos. Meas.Tech. 10(11), 4191–4208 (2017).

9. V. A. Banakh and I. N. J. R. S. Smalikho, “Lidar estimates of the anisotropy of windturbulence in a stable atmospheric boundary layer,” Remote Sens. 11(18), 2115 (2019).

10. T. J. Kane et al., “Coherent laser radar at 1.06 μm using Nd:YAG lasers,” Opt. Lett. 12(4),239–241 (1987).

11. U. N. Singh et al., “Twenty years of Tm:Ho:YLF and LuLiF laser development for globalwind and carbon dioxide active remote sensing,” Opt. Mater. Express 5(4), 827–837 (2015).

12. X. Zhang et al., “Single-frequency polarized eye-safe all-fiber laser with peak power overkilowatt,” Appl. Phys. B 115(1), 123–127 (2014).

13. S. Abdelazim et al., “Development of All-Fiber Coherent Doppler Lidar System forWind Sensing,” in 15th Symp. Meteorological Observation Instrumentation, AmericanMeteorological Society, Boston (2010).

14. A. Joshi et al., “Coherent optical receiver system with balanced photodetection,” Proc. SPIE6243, 62430E (2006).

15. X. Rui et al., “Adaptive iteratively reweighted sine wave fitting method for rapid wind vectorestimation of pulsed coherent Doppler lidar,” Opt. Express 27(15), 21319–21334 (2019).

16. C. Wang et al., “Spatial resolution enhancement of coherent Doppler wind lidar using jointtime-frequency analysis,” Opt. Commun. 424(1), 48–53 (2018).

17. J. Liu et al., “All-fiber airborne coherent Doppler lidar to measure wind profiles,” EPJ WebConf. 119, 10002 (2016).

18. B. W. Barnes et al., “Wind measurements with high energy 2 micron coherent Dopplerlidar,” in 22nd Int. Laser Radar Conf., Matera, Italy (2004).

19. G. D. Emmitt, “Comparison of GWOLF and VALIDAR Doppler lidar measurements,” in2nd Symp. Lidar Atmos. Appl. (2005).

20. H. Inokuchi, H. Tanaka, and T. Ando, “Development of an onboard Doppler lidar for flightsafety,” J. Aircr. 46(4), 1411–1415 (2009).

21. S. Kameyama et al., “Compact all-fiber pulsed coherent Doppler lidar system for windsensing,” Appl. Opt. 46(11), 1953–1962 (2007).

22. K. Asaka, T. Yanagisawa, and Y. Hirano, “1.5 μm eye-safe coherent lidar system for windvelocity measurement,” Proc. SPIE 4153, 321–328 (2001).

23. J. P. Cariou et al., “Long range scanning pulsed coherent lidar for real time wind monitoringin the planetary boundary layer,” in Proc. 16th Conf. Coherent Laser Radar (2011).

24. X. Zhai et al., “Shipborne wind measurement and motion-induced error correction of a coher-ent Doppler lidar over the Yellow Sea in 2014,” Atmos. Meas. Tech. 11(3), 1313–1331 (2018).

25. World Meteorological Organization, WMO Guide to Meteorological Instruments andMethods of Observation, p. 681, Secretariat of the World Meteorological Organization,Geneva, Switzerland (2008).

26. E. Päschke, R. Leinweber, and V. Lehmann, “A one year comparison of 482 MHz radarwind profiler, RS92-SGP radiosonde and 1.5 μm Doppler lidar wind measurements,”Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss 7(11), 11439–11479 (2014).

27. G. J. Koch et al., “Field testing of a high-energy 2-μm Doppler lidar,” J. Appl. Remote Sens.4(1), 043512 (2010).




https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.25.020663

https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.54.12.123103

https://doi.org/10.1557/PROC-1076-K04-05

https://doi.org/10.1557/PROC-1076-K04-05

https://doi.org/10.2514/1.32896

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.27.001142

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4191-2017

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4191-2017

https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11182115

https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.12.000239

https://doi.org/10.1364/OME.5.000827

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00340-013-5582-3

https://doi.org/10.1117/12.664194

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.27.021319

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optcom.2018.04.042

https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201611910002

https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201611910002

https://doi.org/10.2514/1.41738

https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.46.001953

https://doi.org/10.1117/12.417063

https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-1313-2018

https://doi.org/10.5194/amtd-7-11439-2014

https://doi.org/10.1117/1.3368726

28. F. Chouza et al., “Retrieval of aerosol backscatter and extinction from airborne coherentDoppler wind lidar measurements,” Atmos. Meas. Tech. 8(7), 2909–2926 (2015).

29. W. Li and Y. C. Zhang, “The wind-finding performance evaluation of GFE(L)1 secondaryradar,” J. Chengdu Univ. Inf. Technol. 26(1), 91–97 (2011).

30. J. Nash et al., “WMO intercomparison of high quality radiosonde systems, Yangjiang,China, 12 July–3 August 2010,” Report No. 107, World Meteorological Organization(2011).

31. C. M. Administration, “Conventional upper-air weather detection specification,” in ChinaMeteorological Administration, Conventional upper-air weather detection specification,China meteorological Press, Beijing(2010).

Heng Liu received his BS degree from School of Science of Nanchang University in 2017, andhe is a candidate for an MS degree in Optics Engineering in the University of Chinese Academyof Sciences. He is ready for research in laser transmitter and coherent Doppler lidar system.

Xiaopeng Zhu completed his PhD from the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences in2011. He is an associate professor at Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics,Chinese Academy of Sciences. His research interest is in Doppler wind lidar.

Jiqiao Liu completed his PhD from the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2006. Heis a professor at Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Science.He has expertise in Doppler wind lidar, Integrated Path Differential of Absorption lidar andairborne Aerosol and Cloud Detection lidar.

Xiaolei Zhu completed his PhD from the Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2001. He hasexpertise in solid-state lasers and various laser application systems. He is the director of aresearch team in Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics, Chinese Academy ofSciences.

Weibiao Chen is a professor at Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics, ChineseAcademy of Sciences and leader of the space laser and applied system group. His research inter-est is in laser remote sensing application and all-solid laser technology.

Biographies of the other authors are not available.




https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-2909-2015

https://doi.org/10.16836/j.cnki.jcuit.2011.01.015

performance validation on an all- fiber 1 54 m pulsed

Documents